Murray v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2013 Ark. App. 431
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- This is a no-merit appeal from the termination of Heather Murray’s parental rights; counsel filed a motion to withdraw and a no-merit brief under Linker-Flores and Ark. Supreme Court Rule 6-9.0.
- On April 29, 2013, the clerk mailed the briefing packet and Murray was notified of her right to file pro se points; the packet was returned as undeliverable and Murray had no additional contact information.
- Heather Murray’s parental rights to four children, J.D., B.M., C.M., and J.S., were terminated on January 4, 2013; the legal fathers Robert Shelton and Brian Davis had their rights terminated as well and are not involved on appeal.
- Children were removed on Sept. 13–15, 2010 for environmental and medical neglect and inadequate supervision; DHS custody followed, with reunification the initial goal and multiple ordered services for Murray.
- Subsequent hearings led to continued DHS custody, a trial-home placement, and ultimately a change of goal to adoption in July–August 2012; a petition to terminate was filed on August 21, 2012 and termination occurred after a hearing on November 16, 2012.
- The trial court found Murray failed to remedy medical neglect and supervision issues, lacked consistent employment and adequate income, and showed limited progress or faulty decision-making, supporting termination as in the children’s best interests and the likelihood of adoption.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the termination was supported by the record | Murray | DHS | Not clearly erroneous; termination affirmed. |
| Whether service of process violated due process | Murray's counsel contends service to counsel was improper | Service to counsel was adequate; no prejudice shown | Service proper; no basis for reversal. |
| Whether the asserted trial-record objections could merit reversal | Murray argued objections raised on hearing were meritorious | Objections not preserved or meritless | No reversible error found; no meritorious issues. |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. Ark. Dep't of Human Services, 93 Ark.App. 395, 219 S.W.3d 705 (2005) (no-merit review framework for indigent-parent appeals in termination cases (Linker-Flores))
- Linker-Flores v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 364 Ark. 224, 217 S.W.3d 107 (2005) (established no-merit procedure (Anders framework) for termination appeals)
- Linker-Flores v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 364 Ark. 243, 217 S.W.3d 788 (2005) (companion Lewis decision requiring review of record for sufficiency after termination decision)
- Lewis v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 364 Ark. 239, 217 S.W.3d 788 (2005) (requirement to review entire record for sufficiency when no prior orders are appealed)
- Benedict v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 96 Ark.App. 395, 242 S.W.3d 305 (2006) (supporting appellate review standards in termination cases)